this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2024
63 points (92.0% liked)

Technology

59589 readers
3376 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/17999198

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0x0@programming.dev 9 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Ekholm attributes Ericsson's significant network market downturn on Chinese businesses.

So long as Chinese rivals keep selling low-priced goods, telecoms won't be able to put much pressure on them.

Ain't that called free market competition and all?

[–] themurphy@lemmy.ml 5 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Not when it isn't a rich US/EU guy owning the business.

[–] mal3oon@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

It's more about China heavily subsidizing its tech industry, mainly to disrupt western innovations. Same thing is happening with Electrical Vehicles. Typical capitalist bait and switch.

[–] themurphy@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago

That's true, but it's also true that China has prioritised to make automated factories and investing heavily in just plain better battery tech.

I know alot of the money came from the CCP, but when the investments are done, this new tech will outperform other companies on just being better (thinking of EV specifically).

I think I'm just saying that a state investing in tech and technologies is not a bad idea always.